Exhibits in the Haunted
Museum are based on the work of Troy Taylor from his
book, Ghosts by Gaslight!

Click on the Cover for More About the Book!

The actual practice of attempting to capture
ghosts on film dates back nearly a century and a half to around 1861. Not
surprisingly, this type of photography has been controversial and the
subject of much debate ever since.

The reason that is most
given for the lack of widespread acceptance of the credibility of spirit
photographs is that the photographs of the past were so riddled with fraud.
Strangely though, it is spirit photography that seems to provide the most
scientific evidence of ghosts. It is one of the only methods of capturing
ghostly phenomena that approaches the standards of science. The reasons for
this are fairly simple and include the fact that genuine spirit
photos are clearly a physical phenomenon; the amount of energy that goes
into making such a photo can be measured by the way it appears in the image;
a method of attempting to establish replication is possible; and finally,
that it may be possible at some point to develop explanations for how spirit
photographs are made and why they exist.

Spirit photography is what seems to be the effect
of radiation of some sort on photosensitive film. Such results
continue today, although much has changed from the early days of
photography. In those days, the photographer first had to prepare a
glass plate by coating it with a film of collodion (gun cotton
dissolved in ether) containing iodide of potassium, sensitize it by
dipping it into a bath of silver nitrate and then take the photograph
while the plate was still wet. Each exposure was exciting, each batch
of chemicals mixed was a new experiment and every result and reason to
take another. Today, we take photography for granted by simply loading
film into a camera and snapping a picture. But thanks to advances in
film, cameras and technology over the last several decades, it may be
that the controversial science of spirit photography is finally coming
of age. Of course, nothing of the present could exist without the
example of the past.

Spirit photography of today differs greatly from
that of days gone by however. As mentioned already, the fraudulent
spirit photography of the past has damaged the reputation of modern
efforts, making it difficult for today’s ghost hunter’s to be taken
seriously. Just the mention of "spirit photography" tends to conjure
up the images of days gone by, a period that was plagued with
questionable methods and often humorous results. But were all of the
photographs of the past fake images that were created to bilk people
out of their money? It has been claimed that spirit photographs were
first produced by accident and only when unscrupulous photographers
realized the wealth to be made from them were the first fraudulent
images produced. But were they all frauds or did a few fakes muddy the
waters for the many?

A fairly standard
spirit photograph of days past. This was taken by William Hope of a
Mrs. Longcake and what was alleged to be her deceased sister in law.

The very first spirit
photograph has long been erroneously credited to William Mumler, a Boston
engraver in 1861 but as it happens, he was not the first to take a photo
that would later be deemed as "unexplainable". This bizarre event actually
occurred just one year before, but as the photographer was never able to
reproduce the results, he has since faded from memory. His name was W.
Campbell though and he lived in Jersey City, New Jersey. One day, he was
taking a test photograph of an empty chair and while there was no one else
in the studio at the time, the developed plate showed the image of a small
boy. Campbell was never able to produce any more photographs of this nature
however and so it was not until the following year when the history of
spirit photography really began.

The
first "official" spirit photograph has been credited to a Boston engraver
named William Mumler, an experienced and enthusiastic amateur photographer
with a studio on Washington Street. While developing some experimental
self-portraits of himself, a developed plate showed the image of a young
woman standing next to him. As he examined the picture, he recognized the
figure as that of a cousin who had died 12 years earlier. He later recalled
that while posing for the photograph, he had experienced a strange trembling
sensation in his right arm that left him feeling exhausted.

A photograph taken
by William Mumler in the 1860s

The photograph attracted great interest and came
about during the expansion of the Spiritualist movement. It was
investigated by both the Spiritualists and by prominent photographers
of the day, who came to believe Mumler's statement on the subject,
which said: "This photograph was taken by myself of myself and there
was not a living person in the room besides myself." Mumler was soon
overwhelmed by public demand for similar photographs and he began
taking two hours each day from his regular work as an engrave for
Bigelow Bros. and Kennard, one of Boston's best jewelers. Soon, he
gave up his job entirely and devoted his efforts to spirit
photography.

William Black, a leading Boston photographer and
the inventor of the acid nitrate bath (an important improvement in the
photographic process) was one of the professional photographers who
investigated Mumler and his methods. While attending a sitting in
Mumler's studio, Black carefully examined his camera, plate, dipper
and bath and even kept his eye on the plate from the moment its
preparation began, until it was sensitized and locked into the dark
slide. After his portrait was taken, Black removed it from the camera
and took it to the darkroom himself where, as it was developed, he saw
the figure of a man leaning over his shoulder. He had no explanation
for its appearance.

Although he had not previously been interested in spirits
or Spiritualism, Mumler soon began to describe himself as a "medium for
taking spirit photographs" and although the spirit "extras" were often
unrecognizable and blurred, in many of the cases they were the distinct
likenesses of deceased family members and friends. He quickly became the
subject of great controversy. Even the testimony of New York Supreme Court
Judge John Edmonds -- who had gone to see Mumler convinced that he was a
fraud and left convinced that he could actually produce psychic photographs
-- failed to quiet the critics and the non-believers. Mumler finally left
Boston and moved to New York in 1869, where he opened a new studio and
charged as much as $10 per photograph.

The studio began to be frequented
by wealthy and influential patrons. Although many of the photos that
he produced were undistinguished, one one occasion at least he
produced a recognizable (and some believe amazing) spirit portrait of
Abraham Lincoln. A lady who was heavily veiled and wearing a black
dress gave her name as "Mrs. Tydall" when she called unannounced at
the studio and asked to be photographed. In Mumler's words: " I
requested her to be seated, went into my darkroom and coated a plate.
When I came out I found her seated with a veil still over her face.
The crepe veil was so thick that it was impossible to
distinguish a single feature of her face. I asked is she intended
having her picture taken with her veil. She replied, 'When you are
ready, I will remove it.' I said I was ready, upon which she removed
the veil and the picture was taken." It was only when Mumler saw the
developed print that he realized the sitter had been Mary Todd Lincoln
-- for behind her stood the smiling image of Abraham Lincoln himself.
This photograph has been distributed widely over the years and while
some have expressed amazement at it -- most feel that it is likely a
clever hoax.

Mumler's most
famous photograph -- the alleged photo of Mary Lincoln and her
spectral husband

In 1863, a Dr. Child of Philadelphia reported that he
found Mumler to be very willing to give him every opportunity to investigate
his methods and that he was himself interested in finding a rational
solution to the mystery. Mumler permitted Child to watch all of his
operations in the darkroom and allowed him to examine all of his apparatus.
Child showed the pictures made during the investigation and he and several
friends watched the whole process, from the plate cleaning to the
developing. He took the precaution to mark each plate with a diamond before
it was used and yet on each was a spirit image. Child failed completely to
discover any human agency that could have formed the spirit extras. And with
each of these, they differed considerably from any that he had seen before
and he had no way of imitating them.

The extras that appeared in Mumler's photographs did not
meet with universal acclaim though and after more controversy, the Mayor of
New York pressured prosecutors into swearing out a warrant for his arrest on
charges of "swindling credulous persons by what he called spirit
photographs". His trial was widely publicized and he was later acquitted. A
number of eminent New Yorker's spoke out on his behalf and in addition,
a number of professional photographers also testified that they had studied
samples of Mumler’s work and had found no evidence of trickery. One of these
was Jeremiah Gurney, the famous Broadway photographer, and he testified that
he had witnessed Mumler's process, scrutinized everything and could find
nothing that appeared to be fraud or fakery. Mumler was exonerated and his
case dismissed.

Many modern researchers believe that Mumler may have
actually captured something genuine in some of his photos, however, the lure
of money was just too big a temptation for him and he supplemented his
authentic photos with fraudulent ones in order to pay the rent.

Phony spirit
photograph taken by E. Buguet in 1874. The photographer was later
arrested and charged with fraud.

Soon, other photographers, both amateur
and professional, began to come forward and they also called
themselves "mediums", claiming the ability to make dead appear in
photographs. Spirit photography soon became a popular pastime and
literally thousands of dollars were made from those who came to have
their portraits taken. One photographer,
William Hope,
claimed to take more than 2,500 spirit photographs during a period of
about two decades. Few of these photos appear to be in the least bit
authentic.

Typically in the photographs, ghostly
faces appear, floating above and behind the living subjects. In
others, fully formed spirits would appear, usually draped in white
sheets. Unfortunately, the methods of producing such images were
simple. The fraudulent photographers became adept at doctoring their
work, superimposing images on plates with living sitters and adding
ghostly apparitions and double exposures. The appearance of the fully
formed apparition was even easier. Old types of cameras usually
demanded that the subject of the photo remain absolutely still for
periods of up to one minute, all the while, the shutter of the camera
remains open. During this time, it was very simple for the
photographer’s assistant to quietly appear behind the sitter, dressed
in appropriate "spirit attire". The assistant remained in place for a
few moments and then ducked back out of the photo again. On the
finished plate, it would seem that a transparent "figure" had made an
appearance.

This type of "trick photo"
was first mentioned in photography journals in 1856. Ten years later, Sir
David Brewster recalled the technique when he saw some of the early spirit
photos that were produced. He remembered another photo that he had seen of a
young boy who had been sitting on a step near a doorway and who had
apparently gotten up and left about halfway through the exposure. As a
result, the seated image was transparent in the finished photo. Brewster
wrote: "The value and application of this fact did not at first present
itself to me, but after I had contrived the lenticular stereoscope I saw
that such transparent pictures might be used for the various purposes of
entertainment." Ghost and spirit photographs and stereographs were sold
commercially in America through the 1860's and 1870's but were nothing more
than a parlor novelty and were no meant to be taken as genuine spirit
photographs.

A stereoscopic card from
my own collection in which trick photography was used to show
"the devil" appearing in the background.

Other methods of obtaining
fraudulent photographs were used as well. Prepared plates and cut films were
often switched and substituted by slight of hand tricks, replacing those
provided by the investigator. And while this might have fooled a credulous
member of the general public, slight of hand maneuvers and instances of
assistants prancing through photos draped in sheets would not have convinced
hardened and skeptical investigators that the work of the spirit
photographers was credible and even genuine. However, in case after case,
investigators walked away stumped as to how the bizarre images managed to
appear on film. For every fraud who was exposed, there was at least one
other photographer who was never caught cheating.

But unfortunately, there
were many who were not so honest. At about the same time that William Mumler
was going on trial in New York for fraud, a popular spirit photographer
named Frederick Hudson emerged on the scene in London. He was brought to the
public's attention by Mrs. Samuel Guppy, a well-known medium of the day. He
was eventually investigated by a famous professional photographer named John
Beattie in 1873. He carried out a series of experiments with Hudson that
were later published in the British Journal of Photography. At that
time, Hudson was charging a steep fee for his photos, but only with the
understanding that he could not be blamed if nothing unusual appeared, which
often happened. In his article, Beattie described how, with a friend, he had
examined the glass room in Hudson's garden where the experiments were to
take place, the operating room with its yellow light and porcelain baths,
the 10 x 8 inch camera with its 6 - inch lens and all of the machinery
involved. He also maintained that he had marked the photographic plate to be
used and watched it being coated and prepared.

For the first photograph
that Hudson took, using an exposure of about one minute, Beattie sat as the
subject in profile to the background and Hudson's daughter (acting as the
medium) stood next to him. No extra appeared in the photo. For the next
experiment, Beattie wrote: "All was the same except that the medium sat
behind the background. On the picture being developed, a sitting figure
beside myself came out in front of me and between the background and myself.
I am sitting in profile in the picture -- the figure is in a three-quarter
position -- in front of me, but altogether between me and the background.
The figure is draped in black, with a white colored plaid over the head, and
is like both a brother and a nephew of mine. This last point I do not press
because the face is like that of a dead person and under lighted."

Beattie continued: "In my
last trial -- all, if possible, more strictly attended to then before, and
in the same place relative to me -- there came out a standing female figure,
clothed in black skirt, and having a white-colored, thin linen drapery
something like a shawl pattern, upon her shoulders, over which a mass of
black hair loosely hung. The figure is in front of me and, as it were,
partially between me and the camera."

Beattie had assumed that Hudson was in
some way faking the photographs but was now no longer convinced of
this. He was convinced that the figures were not double exposures, had
not been projected in some way, were not the result of mirrors or even
the result of images that had been manipulated onto the plates during
the developing process. What he did not take into consideration though
was that the images could have been on the plates all along -- that
his own plates had been switched for "trick plates" by the
photographer. This seems to have been the standard operating procedure
for many of the so-called spirit photographers of the day and it was
not realized for quite some time. Many of them, including a Mr.
Parkes, who produced a number of psychic images even allowed
themselves to be observed while working on the plates. Parkes, for
instance, had an aperture cut into the wall of his darkroom so that
investigators could see inside while he went through the developing
process. The problem was that the investigators had no idea just what
plates he was actually developing!

A spirit photo
taken by Fredrick Hudson. The sitter was Raby Wootton, who, with
friends, took the photograph and developed it themselves without
allowing Hudson to take part in it. They never realized how easy it
would be for Hudson to switch the plate that he gave them to develop!

In 1874, a French
photographer named E. Buguet opened up a studio and also began a career
capturing the spirits on film. Most of his photographs were of famous
people, most of whom claimed to recognize deceased loved ones and family
members as extras. This did not stop him from being arrested for fraud and
tried by the French government though. He admitted deception but even then,
there were many who refused to accept his confession as genuine, claiming
that he had been paid off by the church to plead guilty. In his confession,
he stated that his photographs were created by double exposure. First, he
would dress up his assistants to play the part of a ghost, or would
dress up a doll in sheet. This figure, along with a stock of heads, was
seized by the police when they raided his studio. Buguet was fined and
sentenced to a year in prison.

Even after this, his
supporters continued to exist his photographs were real. Reverend Stainton
Moses, the famous medium, was convinced that at least some of Buguet's
spirit photographs were authentic. He said that the prosecution of the case
was tainted by religious officials, that the judge was biased or that Buguet
must have been bribed or terrorized to confess.

The 1870’s saw the first general acceptance that there
might be something credible to at least some aspects of spirit photography.
A number of references to it appeared in issues of the British Journal of
Photography and in other periodicals of the time. In the 1890’s, J.
Traille Taylor, the editor of the Journal, reviewed the history of
spirit photography and detailed the methods by which fraudulent photos were
sometimes produced. He approached the phenomenon as a true skeptic, not
immediately disbelieving it, but studying it in a scientific manner. He used
a stereoscopic camera and noted that the psychically produced images did not
appear to be in three dimensions. He used his own camera and he and his
assistants did all of the developing and photographing. Strangely, they were
still able to produce mysterious results.

In 1891, the practice of spirit photography gained more
credibility when Alfred Russell Wallace, the co-developer of the theory of
evolution, spoke out with the belief that spirit photography should be
studied scientifically. He later wrote about his own investigations into it
and included a statement that he believed the possibility of it was real. He
did not feel that just because some of the photos that had been documented
were obviously fraudulent, that all of them could be dismissed as hoaxes.

Despite such notable interest in the field, little was
heard of spirit photography (outside of Spiritualist circles) for a number
of years. But during this time, some fairly spectacular photos did manage to
appear and some of them have remained unexplained ever since. Perhaps
my favorite of this period has been referred to as the "Lord Combermere
Photograph". The photo was taken in 1891 (and first published in 1895) by
Sybell Corbett, who was staying with her sister at Combermere Abbey in
Cheshire, England. She decided to take a photo of the large library there
and used an exposure of about one hour, a fact that she noted in her diary.
Although no one was in the room when the photo was taken, the developed
plate showed the faint image of a man seated in one of the chairs. The
photograph was shown to a relative of Lord Combermere and it was identified
as being the man himself. The problem with this was at the time the photo
was taken, Lord Combermere was being buried in a churchyard a few miles
away. He had been killed in an accident just five days before! The photo has
defied explanation ever since.

In 1911, spirit photography entered the mainstream with
the publication of the book Photographing the Invisible by James
Coates. It covered dozens of cases of spirit photographs in detail and was
later revised and expanded in 1921. It remains one of the most comprehensive
books on the subject during this period and it managed to bring spirit
photography into the mainstream for the first time. Following the
publication of the book, several noteworthy articles appeared on spirit
photography, including one by James Hyslop, a Columbia University professor.
He wrote an introduction to a series of experiments carried out by Charles
Cook of two American spirit photographers, Edward Wyllie of Los Angeles and
Alex Martin of Denver. Cook did extensive work with the two men in 1916 and
provided them with his own plates and had them developed by a commercial
studio. In this way, he eliminated any opportunity that the two men might
have had to doctor the images. Cook concluded that the photographs submitted
were genuine but in these cases thought the name "psychic photography"
better matched the phenomenon. He believed that the two men actually
produced the images through some psychical means, rather than actually
photographing ghosts.

Despite the failure to debunk a number of the spirit
photographs of the time, the reality of the photographs was not accepted by
the scientists of the day. As it is today, the majority of them simply
refused to examine the data and assumed that fraud was more than adequate to
explain the findings. One of the few exceptions was Sir William Crookes, the
distinguished chemist and physicist. For 30 years, he was a member of the
Royal Society and was known for his discovery of thallium, his studies of
photography and other scientific work. At the invitation of several
skeptical members of the Royal Society, he agreed to take on a six month
study of psychic phenomenon. Instead of just six months though, his work
continued for years and he came to the conclusion that much of what he
studied (including psychic photographs) was genuine. He presented his
findings in both book and article form but soon became discouraged about
convincing most of his scientific colleagues of the reality of what he was
doing. He endured ridicule and disdain, but never wavered from his beliefs.
More than 25 years later, he would maintain that spirit photography could,
and did, exist.

As time passed and photographic
techniques and equipment became more advanced, researchers began to
discover that some of the photographs being taken in allegedly haunted
locations could not be explained away as film flaws and tricks of
light. Gone were the days of phony photos that were taken by so-called
spirit mediums in studios. They had been replaced by often accidental
photos that defied all logic.

One of the most convincing
photographs was the famous image of the "Brown Lady" of Raynham Hall in Norfolk,
England. The photo was taken Captain Provand, a professional photographer, who was taking
snapshots of the house for Britains Country Life magazine in September 1936. His
assistant, Indre Shira, actually saw the apparition coming down the staircase and directed
Provand to take the photo... even though the other man saw nothing at the time. The
resulting image (shown here) has been examined by experts many times, although no
explanation for it has ever been given.

The Famous Brown
Lady Photograph

Another amazing photograph is
that of the Greenwich Ghost. This photo was taken in 1966 at Queens House,
Greenwich, London by Reverend RW Hardy. Although nothing was seen at the time, the
developed image clearly shows a shrouded figure, bent over and climbing the stairs. The
photo and original negative were examined at length by Kodak and by other photographic
experts. They were completely unable to explain the figure and are sure the photo was not
double-exposed.

The emergence of modern
science in the first half of the 1800's had helped to dispel the superstitions
of the past but scientists were unable to connect the mysterious evidence
obtained by spirit photography to the progress they were making in other
fields. Because of this, most of the investigation and research into the field
was carried out by Spiritualists, who believed that far too many of the
photographs were genuine, thus validating their often unpopular beliefs. The
debunkers of today simply point to the usually ridiculous images that were
produced as proof that the entire field was corrupt. As most of us know
though, nothing is ever that clear cut when it comes to the paranormal -- nor
are answers ever that easily obtained.

THE WORLD'S MOST FAMOUS SPIRIT
PHOTOGRAPHS

Since the invention of the camera, people have been attempting to take
photographs of ghosts. What could be better proof of their existence
than the ability to capture a spirit’s image on film? Unfortunately,
many “spirited” efforts have led to failure and, even worse,
outright fraud.

Trickery was introduced in the early days of the photographic process,
which coincided with the heyday of the Spiritualist movement. In 1861, a
Boston engraver named William Mumler started shooting photographs that
included faint images that were alleged to be his customer’s deceased
loved ones. Business boomed until someone noticed that the “Spirit
Faces” resembled a number of living residents of Boston! The “spirits”
in the photographs were soon recognized as double exposures and
over-printed images and Mumler was arrested and charged with fraud.

Regardless though, fake spirit photography has flourished ever since
because in addition to fraud, there are also literally thousands of
photos that allege to be ghosts that are merely mistakes caused in
processing or during the actual photography. Camera straps, reflections
and light refractions are often mistaken for ghosts on film... but that’s
not to say that no real photos of ghosts exist!

In fact, there have been a number of such photos that have been taken
over the years for which no clear explanations exist. Photos can often
appear for which no evidence of fraud, trickery or mistakes can be
discovered. The photos presented here all lay claim to being legitimate.
In each case, the photographer claimed to be surprised by the end
results of the photograph.

This Series of Photos, from a Spiritualist
sťance at Camp Chesterfield, Indiana, once stunned researchers. The
photos have remained controversial and debate continues both for an
against their authenticity.

The photo shown here is the
famous “Lord Combermere Photograph”, which was first published in
1895. It gained almost instant fame among psychic researchers and
remains a mystery to this day.

The photo was part of an account by Miss Sybell Corbett who took the
photograph in December 1891 while staying with her sister at Combermere
Abbey in Cheshire, England.

The photo was actually taken of the
splendid library of the house and the camera was placed with a long exposure
of about one hour, details of which were carefully noted in her photographic
diary.Although no one was in the room at the time of the exposure, the developed
plate showed the head, body and arms of an older man, seated in a high-backed
chair to the left side of the room. The photo was shown to a relative of Lord
Combermere and she announced that if did resemble the man. However, not
everyone agreed about this. Regardless, the features of the man are hard to
distinguish.

The strangest thing about the photo was that, at the time it was taken, Lord
Combermere was attending a funeral at the local churchyard in Wrenbury, a few
miles away. The funeral was his own! Lord Combermere had been killed a few
days earlier in a road accident in London.

As mentioned, the photo caused
quite a stir and attracted the attention of Sir William Barrett, an
investigator for the Society of Psychical Research. He experimented with
a similar photo process and then first dismissed this photograph as an
unintentional mistake. He surmised that a servant had entered the room
while the shutter of the camera was open, sat down in the chair and then
left, leaving behind a faint, and rather “ghostly” image.

After further investigation though, Barrett reconsidered. He later
learned that the image did not resemble any of the servants in the house
and that all of the male servants had been away attending their master’s
funeral anyway. He confessed to being perplexed and the photograph
remains mysterious today.

This next photo was taken in 1959 by Mrs. Mabel Chimney in a British
churchyard. She had just finished photographing her mother’s grave and
then took a picture of her husband, who was waiting for her in the car.
He was alone in the auto at that time, yet the developed photograph
clearly showed Mrs. Chimney’s mother in the back seat of the car. A
photo expert examined it for a British newspaper and declared the photo
to be authentic. In fact, he went as far as to declare, “I stake my
reputation on the fact that this picture is genuine,” he said.

Perhaps the most famous ghost photo of all time is that of the “Brown
Lady of Raynham Hall”. In September 1936, a photographer, Mr. Indre Shira,
was commissioned by Lady Townsend of Raynham Hall in Norfolk, England to take
a series of photographs of the house for “Country Life” magazine. Shira
and his assistant were just setting up their equipment for shots of the grand
staircase when the photographer saw what he described as “ a vapoury form
which gradually assumed the shape of a woman in a veil.”

The figure slowly began to ascend
the stairs and, very excited, Shira took a hasty photograph. The
assistant however, was amused by his employer’s excitement,
maintaining (even afterward) that he had seen nothing on the stairs. In
fact, he admitted that he thought Shira was delusional.

He changed his mind after the plate was developed though and saw the
phantom outline of a human figure on the stairs. Experts who examined the
plate were puzzled and agreed that the image was not the result of any form of
trickery.

Author and researcher Thurston Hopkins also studied the photo and he too
declared it genuine. “It may well be the most genuine ghost photograph we
possess,” he added, “and no study of the supernatural is complete without
a reference to it.”

The next print is a color photograph
that was taken in the Australian outback by the Reverend R.S. Blance at
Corroboree Rock, located 100 miles from Alice Springs. The photo was
taken in 1959.
According to the legends of the site, the place was known for being a
spot where the Aborigine tribesmen carried out terrible ceremonies in
the past. According to the minister, there was no other human activity
in the area at the time the photo was taken.

This photo, and others like it, have
become important pieces of evidence in the search for authentic photos
because in many cases, the identity of the photographer (in this case, a
respected reverend) go a long way in making it possible for the photos
to be deemed authentic. Rarely is a witness or a photographer as far
above reproach as a minister is.

This photo is another that has become
quite famous over the years. It shows a hooded figure that seems to
float on the steps of the altar at England’s Newby Church. The photo was
taken in the 1960’s by the Reverend K.F. Lord, who was merely
photographing the front of the sanctuary. He reported that he saw no
such figure at the time of his visit.

This photograph comes to us courtesy of Jude Huff-Felz and was
taken during an investigation of Bachelor’s Grove Cemetery near
Chicago.

The photo was taken on infra-red film
during a daytime excursion to the reputedly haunted graveyard. In the
developed photograph, there appeared a semi-transparent figure of a woman
seated on a tombstone within the cemetery grounds. She was not visible to
anyone who was present and in fact, the image appeared in a much larger,
almost panoramic view of the cemetery. The portion of the photo where the
woman appears was enlarged when investigators noticed there was something
out of the ordinary about it.

Skeptics declared the photo a hoax (as
usual) but I have every reason to believe it is genuine. I had a copy of the
photo examined by a number of professional photographers and while they
would have liked to say that it was a fraud, they admitted that they were
unable to. They ruled out the possibility of a double-exposure and the
theory that it was a photo of a live woman who was made to appear like a
ghost. One critic declared she was casting a shadow, but this is nothing
more than the natural coloring of the landscape. Besides that, if she is
casting a shadow in that direction, why isn’t anything else?

This last photograph is another
fascinating one. It depicts a cowled figure that was photographed by a
Canadian tourist, Reverend R.W. Hardy, who was visiting England in 1966.
The photo was taken at Queen’s House in Greenwich and it was intended to
be solely of the grand Tulip Staircase there. When the photo was
developed, the figure was seen, apparently climbing the stairs. The
photo has been examined many times over the years, but thus far, has
withstood all allegations of fraud.